Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/02/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: character “5001” in Figure 1. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because Figure 5B designates the “current detection unit” as the character “810” instead of “710” as mentioned in paragraphs [0047], [0050], [0057], and [0066] of the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hase et al. (US 11780244 B2) in view of Saito (US 20130242022 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hase teaches an ink-jet recording apparatus (Figure 1, “image forming apparatus 100” described in column 4, lines 8-14.) comprising:
a first belt configured to heat a sheet (Figure 17, “heat belt 40” that heats the “sheet P” described in column 21, lines 24-40.);
a heating unit disposed inside the first belt and configured to heat the first belt in a non-contact manner (Column 23, lines 10-14 describes a halogen heater that is a non-contact heating source for the drying device. Column 11, lines 64-67 and Column 12, lines 1-3 further discloses how the “heat belt 40” could be heated by a heater that is a non-contact type heater.);
a second belt (Figure 17, “heat belt 48” described in column 21, lines 24-40.) configured to come into contact with the first belt to form a nip portion together with the first belt (Figure 17, the “heat belt 40” and the “heat belt 48” are pressed together), and configured to fix an ink image on the sheet to the sheet in the nip portion (Figure 17, the ink liquid applied to “face Pa” of the “sheet P” is dried when the two belts effectively heat the “sheet P” described in column 22, lines14-26.);
a pressing member configured to come into contact with an inner circumferential surface of the second belt in the nip portion, configured to press the first belt via the second belt (Figure 14, “support roller 38” acts as a pressing member for “heat belt 40” from the inner circumference of the “heat belt 48” described in column 21, lines 41-55.), and including an opening formed in a heated region to be heated by the heating unit (Figure 14 displays the “support roller 38” with a “heater 37” placed within described in column 22, lines 27-36. Therefore, the “support roller 38” includes an opening to allow the “heater 37” to be placed within.); and
a temperature detection member (Figure 7, “temperature detector 29” within one embodiment of the heating device by the “heat belt 40” described in column 11, lines 42-50.)
Hase fails to teach where the temperature detection member is disposed in the opening and configured to detect a temperature of the inner circumferential surface of the second belt.
However, Saito teaches where the temperature detection member is disposed in the opening and configured to detect a temperature of the inner circumferential surface of the second belt (Paragraph [0031] describes how a temperature sensor is provided by the surface of the “rollers” that heat and pressurize the “sheet P” that is provided in the space between the two “heat conveying members 103a-b” that comprises of “pressure rollers 103d-g”.).
Hase and Saito are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an ink-jet recording apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the image forming apparatus taught by Hase to dispose the temperature detection member in the opening of the pressing member and configured to detect a temperature of the inner circumferential surface of the second belt taught by Saito. This would have been done to detect the temperature at the surface of a roller and belt (Saito, paragraph [0031].)
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Hase and Saito teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1.
Hase fails to teach wherein a plurality of heating units is provided along a sheet conveyance direction.
However, Saito teaches wherein a plurality of heating units is provided along a sheet conveyance direction. (Figure 1 displays how there are more than one heating conveying members 103a-b that are disposed along the “second conveyance path 106” described in paragraph [0019])
Modified Hase and Saito are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an ink jet recording apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the image forming apparatus taught by Hase to provide a plurality of heating units along a sheet conveyance direction as taught by Saito. This would have been done to heat the sheet to a predefined temperature (Saito, paragraph [0018]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Hase and Saito teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 5.
Hase fails to teach wherein a plurality of temperature detection members is provided and is disposed at respective positions corresponding to a plurality of heated regions of the plurality of heating units.
However, Saito teaches wherein a plurality of temperature detection members is provided and is disposed at respective positions corresponding to a plurality of heated regions of the plurality of heating units (Paragraph [0031] describe the Figure 2 and how a temperature sensor is provided by the surface of the “rollers” of each “conveying members 103a-b” that heat and pressurize the “sheet P” that is provided in the space between the two “heat conveying members 103a-b” that comprises of “pressure rollers 103d-g”).
Modified Hase and Saito are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an ink jet recording apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the image forming apparatus taught by Hase to provide and dispose a plurality of temperature detection members at respective positions corresponding to a plurality of heated regions of the plurality of heating units as taught by Saito. This would have been done for the purpose of detecting the temperature at the surface and send the information to the control unit (Saito, paragraph [0031]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Hase and Saito teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1, Hase further discloses wherein the pressing member is configured to press the second belt at least in the heated region. (Figure 14 displays how the “support roller 38” presses the “heat belt 48” at the area “H” which is where the “sheet P” is heated described in column 19, lines 58-63.)
Claim(s) 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Hase et al. (US 11780244 B2) in view of Saito (US 20130242022 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Seto et al. (US 8509675 B2).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Hase and Saito teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1.
Modified Hase fails to teach wherein the pressing member is made of metal.
However, Seto teaches wherein the pressing member is made of metal (Figure 1 displays a “pressure roller 24” within the “image forming unit 1A” made of metal described in column 8, lines 65-67 and in column 9, lines 1-3.)
Modified Hase and Seto are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an ink jet recording apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the image forming apparatus taught by Hase so that the pressing member is made of metal as taught by Seta. This would have been done for the purpose of using a highly conductive and durable material to heat the belt.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Hase, Saito, and Seto teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 2, Hase further discloses wherein a surface of the pressing member is configured to slide with the second belt (Figure 14 displays the “support roller 38” that rolls as the “heat belt 48” is moved.).
Modified Hase fails to teach wherein a surface of the pressing member is embossed
However, Seto teaches wherein a surface of the pressing member is embossed (Figure 1 displays a “pressure roller 24” within the “image forming unit 1A” made of metal and is “coated with a parting layer”, as described in columns 8-9, lines 65-67 and 1-3, similar to the metal plate “heating guide member 135” that is also coated.)
Modified Hase and Seto are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an ink jet recording apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the image forming apparatus taught by Hase to also apply wherein a surface of the pressing member is embossed taught by Seto. This would have been done for the purpose of increasing slidability (Seto, column 9, lines 38-44).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hase et al. (US 11780244 B2) in view of Saito (US 20130242022 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takeuchi et al. (US 8983326 B2).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Hase and Saito teaches the ink-jet recording apparatus according to claim 1,
Modified Hase fails to teach wherein the heating unit includes a reflector that opens toward the heated region.
However, Takeuchi teaches wherein the heating unit includes a reflector that opens toward the heated region (Figure 6 displays the “reflective plate 84” that is opened towards the “heating unit (nip plate 83)” of the described in column 8, lines 64-67 and column 9, lines 1-3.).
Modified Hase and Takeuchi are considered analogous to the art because they are in the same field involving an ink jet recording apparatus. Therefore, it would be obvious for someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the image forming apparatus taught by Hase so that the heating unit includes a reflector that opens toward the heated region taught by Takeuchi. This would have been done for the purpose of reflecting the radiant heat toward the heating region (Takeuchi, column 8, lines 64-65).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for allowance of claim 4 is the inclusion of “wherein the temperature detection member is located below a contact surface between the pressing member and the second belt”.
Claim 8 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for allowance of claim 8 is the inclusion of “wherein a curving process is performed on one side of the opening and the one side of the opening is configured to slide with the second belt.”
Claim 9 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for allowance of claim 8 is the inclusion of “the temperature detection member is a contact-type temperature detection member, part of which protrudes from the opening, configured to detect a temperature of the second belt.”
Claim 11 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for allowance of claim 11 is the inclusion of “wherein, in a sheet conveyance direction, the temperature detection member is disposed between an upstream end of the reflector and a downstream end of the reflector.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA DEPHENIA QUINN whose telephone number is (571)272-6375. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30 - 4:00 CT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571)431-0716. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/N.D.Q./Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/DOUGLAS X RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853